7950X is out of stock at quite a few places and given the headaches assosiated with dual CCD x3D chips, 7800x3D is a better deal for average consumers.

I have a 7800X3D on the way to test that Gaming notion. I have been using a 7900X3D for over a year with no complaints.

To be honest,
I think they should ditch the Async approach.
And just make the X3D CPU having 3D cache on both CCDs.
And tune the frequency to maximize power efficiency.

The Async problem is the main reason why I went for 7800X3D instead of 7950X3D

CrackongTo be honest,
I think they should ditch the Async approach.
And just make the X3D CPU having 3D cache on both CCDs.
And tune the frequency to maximize power efficiency.

The Async problem is the main reason why I went for 7800X3D instead of 7950X3D

This will not solve anything, and AMD's approach was the right one. The problem isn't that the other CCD doesnt have Vcache, it's the fact that there's a latency penalty when going from one CCD to the other so it's best to just assign games to one CCD. Whenever a thread decides to jump a CCD, performance drops. Xbox game bar can help mitigate that, but there are some, mostly older, games that doesn't use the game bar so they need a sort of thread director which will assign cores in a better way. Sure, AMD likes doing things through the OS so they can just devise a better solution with MS when Zen 5 drops. It will even help the non X3D CPU's

$600 in Canada... nice drop but not good enough:

mkppoThis will not solve anything, and AMD's approach was the right one. The problem isn't that the other CCD doesnt have Vcache, it's the fact that there's a latency penalty when going from one CCD to the other so it's best to just assign games to one CCD. Whenever a thread decides to jump a CCD, performance drops. Xbox game bar can help mitigate that, but there are some, mostly older, games that doesn't use the game bar so they need a sort of thread director which will assign cores in a better way. Sure, AMD likes doing things through the OS so they can just devise a better solution with MS when Zen 5 drops. It will even help the non X3D CPU's

I have been with a 7900X3D for a year now and I haven't noticed any kind of hiccup in games. WoW is probably the most CPU intensive game I play and is rock solid, though I limit all games FPS to 120 for ULMB, maybe I don't reach a count high enough.

CrackongAnd just make the X3D CPU having 3D cache on both CCDs.

YES. Although that would probably be expensive.

Also make the 7900x 3d an 8+4, the current 6+6 configuration is a bit clowny. Who the hell thought that that's okay...

419€ in Germany atm, for 3 weeks now, which is about 384$. The 7800X3D is about 50$ cheaper.

fevgatosYES. Although that would probably be expensive.

Also make the 7900x 3d an 8+4, the current 6+6 configuration is a bit clowny. Who the hell thought that that's okay...

If you give the cache to the 8 cores, like for the 7800X3D, would the 4 extra cores just be an afterthought? Or instead if you gave it to the 4 cores, how would games perform then? I wonder if any 7950X3D owners could test this…

hsewIf you give the cache to the 8 cores, like for the 7800X3D, would the 4 extra cores just be an afterthought? Or instead if you gave it to the 4 cores, how would games perform then? I wonder if any 7950X3D owners could test this…

You are replying to an Intel fan boy. All of them will tell you it sucks because it is "only" 6 cores

hsewIf you give the cache to the 8 cores, like for the 7800X3D, would the 4 extra cores just be an afterthought? Or instead if you gave it to the 4 cores, how would games perform then? I wonder if any 7950X3D owners could test this…

Give it to the 8cores,have it act like a proper 8core cpu in games, the other 4 games is for the multithreaded loads. Currently it's just a Frankenstein.

kapone32You are replying to an Intel fan boy. All of them will tell you it sucks because it is "only" 6 cores

Pot, meet kettle. I literally got the only infraction points on my record (Sorry not sorry!) after 4 years of being a TPU regular for ruthlessly making fun of that post of yours that you were claiming to have been ordained by God to judge between Good (AMD) and Evil (Intel and NVIDIA), so, really, knock that off. fevgatos may be openly an Intel diehard but then again, you're even more of an AMD one yourself.

The suboptimal topology is just one of the reasons why the 7900X3D isn't a popular processor. It has the same problem as the 12- and 24-core Threadrippers had, if you had the money to build such a system you would either go with the cheap option (8-core/1900X) or with the real deal (the 16- and 32-core TR's). It exists in a vacuum between a gaming one-trick pony (7800X3D) and a true productivity powerhouse (7950X and its 3D counterpart), while giving up on the 7950X's aggressive clock frequencies and the 7900's lower cost and reduced footprint.

That's why it's already on a fire sale and I doubt AMD has many reasons to keep manufacturing this SKU for much longer. It never meant that it's a bad processor, no one ever said that. People only said that there are better options for the money, depending on the objective of your build. That's from both AMD and Intel. At $389, though? This is an absolute steal, and people who can purchase one at such a low price are very lucky indeed and will not be disappointed, not at this price.

fevgatosGive it to the 8cores,have it act like a proper 8core cpu in games, the other 4 games is for the multithreaded loads. Currently it's just a Frankenstein.

Maybe you should read the review posted. As I state many times this is like stating that the 5900X is a worthless CPU. Then you add Vcache and I laugh at your comments about how weak these CPUs are.

The 7950X3D is $799 where I live

www.newegg.ca/amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d-ryzen-9-7000-series/p/N82E16819113791?Item=N82E16819113791

The 7900X3D is $599

www.newegg.ca/amd-ryzen-9-7900x3d-ryzen-9-7000-series/p/N82E16819113792

When I got mine the 7900X3D was $699 and the 7950X3D was $999.

That $300 is a mitigating factor in not getting 4/8 more cores/threads.

I had a 5800X3D after using a 5900X and do you know what I missed? The snappiness of turning on the PC, Waking the PC from sleep, running websites, Streaming and application loading. That is why even though I knew the 7800X3D was being launched, I still got the 7900X3D and love it. Just look at the Cache size of the CPU.

Dr. DroPot, meet kettle. I literally got the only infraction points on my record (Sorry not sorry!) after 4 years of being a TPU regular for ruthlessly making fun of that post of yours that you were claiming to have been ordained by God to judge between Good (AMD) and Evil (Intel and NVIDIA), so, really, knock that off. fevgatos may be openly an Intel diehard but then again, you're even more of an AMD one yourself.

The suboptimal topology is just one of the reasons why the 7900X3D isn't a popular processor. It has the same problem as the 12- and 24-core Threadrippers had, if you had the money to build such a system you would either go with the cheap option (8-core/1900X) or with the real deal (the 16- and 32-core TR's). It exists in a vacuum between a gaming one-trick pony (7800X3D) and a true productivity powerhouse (7950X and its 3D counterpart), while giving up on the 7950X's aggressive clock frequencies and the 7900's lower cost and reduced footprint.

That's why it's already on a fire sale and I doubt AMD has many reasons to keep manufacturing this SKU for much longer. It never meant that it's a bad processor, no one ever said that. People only said that there are better options for the money, depending on the objective of your build. That's from both AMD and Intel. At $389, though? This is an absolute steal, and people who can purchase one at such a low price are very lucky indeed and will not be disappointed, not at this price.

Yep the 7900X3d is the only X3D 7000 chip on sale. Don't make laugh about trying to bash the 2920X and saying the 1900X was better or felt faster is just foolish. By the way I had Threadripper and I also had both of those CPUs so you can come again. My 2920X runs a 6 Virtual machine PC just fine. Even Memory support is much better on the 2920x vs the 1900X. As far as money was concerned there were boards like the As Rock Challenger X399 for $299 or the Asus X399 Strix for $349. I even bought a Asus Maximus X399 from Earthdog.

The only thing that happened with Threadripper was the rise of digital content made an industry for it. That made the next generation of CPUs priced accordingly. I felt salted but when I saw the 5900X blew the 2920X away in CPU performance I came back down. With X570S and now X670E my I/O has been resolved as I have a nice 26.5 TB array of RAID 0 and other combined NAND storage and can still add another SSD.

kapone32Maybe you should read the review posted. As I state many times this is like stating that the 5900X is a worthless CPU. Then you add Vcache and I laugh at your comments about how weak these CPUs are.

The 7950X3D is $799 where I live

www.newegg.ca/amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d-ryzen-9-7000-series/p/N82E16819113791?Item=N82E16819113791

The 7900X3D is $599

www.newegg.ca/amd-ryzen-9-7900x3d-ryzen-9-7000-series/p/N82E16819113792

When I got mine the 7900X3D was $699 and the 7950X3D was $999.

That $300 is a mitigating factor in not getting 4/8 more cores/threads.

I had a 5800X3D after using a 5900X and do you know what I missed? The snappiness of turning on the PC, Waking the PC from sleep, running websites, Streaming and application loading. That is why even though I knew the 7800X3D was being launched, I still got the 7900X3D and love it. Just look at the Cache size of the CPU.

I don't need reviews to tell me that a 6core gaming chip is not considered high end for gaming. I'm glad you like it though, it's just isn't for me.

But I'm glad you agree with my overall sentiment about the 7800x 3d. It's dog slow and bad user experience for the asking price.

fevgatosI don't need reviews to tell me that a 6core gaming chip is not considered high end for gaming. I'm glad you like it though, it's just isn't for me.

But I'm glad you agree with my overall sentiment about the 7800x 3d. It's dog slow and bad user experience for the asking price.

First of all you are missing the point. Where did you see may see that the 7800X3D is a slow CPU? I know you are applying a ton sarcasm to your comment. There is no need to bash AMD in this thread. It is only about the price of the 7900X3D and if it is a good value at $389 US.

If you read the review you would see that the biggest caveat to the 7900X3D was price. I guess in the US there is only a $100 difference in price but I did not need a review to know how 12 core Dual CCD chips perform. At $389 it is a great buy.

kapone32First of all you are missing the point. Where did you see may see that the 7800X3D is a slow CPU? I know you are applying a ton sarcasm to your comment. There is no need to bash AMD in this thread. It is only about the price of the 7900X3D and if it is a good value at $389 US.

If you read the review you would see that the biggest caveat to the 7900X3D was price. I guess in the US there is only a $100 difference in price but I did not need a review to know how 12 core Dual CCD chips perform. At $389 it is a great buy.

Didn't you say that you bought the 7900x 3d because it's faster snapper loads faster etc. over the 7800x 3d? That's called the user experience.

fevgatosDidn't you say that you bought the 7900x 3d because it's faster snapper loads faster etc. over the 7800x 3d? That's called the user experience.

Yes I did. That does not mean it is slow. I did get in the 7800X3D that I said was on the way in another post as well. When I got the 7900X3D there was no 7800X3D. I used my experience of a 5800X3D vs a 5900X. So did the tens of thousands of users that asked AMD to add Vcache to their Dual CCD CPUs. AMD tried just that and found no benefit vs one (their words). Now TPU has the 7950X3D vs the 7800X3D and there is no comparison in some instances between those 2 chips but the 7800X3D is 3-7% faster in Gaming and being cheaper is the recommended one by most reviewers.

fevgatosI don't need reviews to tell me that a 6core gaming chip is not considered high end for gaming. I'm glad you like it though, it's just isn't for me.

But I'm glad you agree with my overall sentiment about the 7800x 3d. It's dog slow and bad user experience for the asking price.

7800X3D's primary target was to be the fastest gaming CPU there is, a target they wholeheartedly achieved. Not sure what your definition of dog slow is, but it's an 8 core CPU with very slightly lower productivity performance than their usual 8 core non X3D CPU isn't that. It's perfectly fine for it's intended purpose along with light productivity. Also, what's the bad user experience part? A gaming CPU's user experience is predominantly gaming, a function it excels at.

fevgatosYES. Although that would probably be expensive.

Also make the 7900x 3d an 8+4, the current 6+6 configuration is a bit clowny. Who the hell thought that that's okay...

Did you not read my post above that adding Vcache in the other CCD is the wrong approach and will not solve anything? What's that 'YES' for?

fevgatosYES. Although that would probably be expensive.

Also make the 7900x 3d an 8+4, the current 6+6 configuration is a bit clowny. Who the hell thought that that's okay...

Thousands who have decided to buy it and enjoy it.

fevgatosGive it to the 8cores,have it act like a proper 8core cpu in games, the other 4 games is for the multithreaded loads. Currently it's just a Frankenstein.

No. It's easy for AMD to offer 7900X3D as all CCDs that do not meet criteria for 8 core CCD could be packaged as 7900X3D. No brainer.

johnspack$600 in Canada... nice drop but not good enough:

We Kanuckistanians just can't have nice things

Dr. DroThat's why it's already on a fire sale and I doubt AMD has many reasons to keep manufacturing this SKU for much longer. It never meant that it's a bad processor, no one ever said that. People only said that there are better options for the money, depending on the objective of your build. That's from both AMD and Intel. At $389, though? This is an absolute steal, and people who can purchase one at such a low price are very lucky indeed and will not be disappointed, not at this price.

This. Exactly. Its main problem was high price, just like 7900XT. Now, it's great. It used to sell 80-100 units on Mindfactory on a weekly basis, which suggests thousands a week globally. CCDs on AM4 that do not meet 8 core criteria are offered as 5600X3D and 5700X3D. On AM5, the same function plays 7900X3D that can be assembled from CCDs where one of two cores are defective in some way.

It was never meant to be popular. It's just another option in-between 8 and 16 cores. I have 5900X. It's perfectly fine for my needs, whereby I need a bit more than 8 cores, but do not need an overkill 16 core SKU.

fevgatosI don't need reviews to tell me that a 6core gaming chip is not considered high end for gaming. I'm glad you like it though, it's just isn't for me.

But I'm glad you agree with my overall sentiment about the 7800x 3d. It's dog slow and bad user experience for the asking price.

Are you not wasting your time in this article's thread? Who are you trying to convince?

mkppoThe problem isn't that the other CCD doesnt have Vcache, it's the fact that there's a latency penalty when going from one CCD to the other

I wonder if it even goes from one CCD to the other. The latency (Anandtech measured it) to the other CCD is the same as the latency for RAM access, or nearly.

WirkoI wonder if it even goes from one CCD to the other. The latency (Anandtech measured it) to the other CCD is the same as the latency for RAM access, or nearly.

CCD jumps are rare but do occur, mostly in older games and ones that don't run through the game bar. And you're right, AT were one of the very few who did inter CCD tests and the penalty is pretty high. This is pretty much why simply adding X3D to the other CCD is pointless and if anything will needlessly reduce the clockspeed of the other CCD and hamper productivity.

Tom's Hardware review of 7900X3D clearly shows which crowd could benefit using this CPU. It's no brainer CPU at this price, but not for everyone's needs. For example, it'd be perfect for me for media creation in Handbrake and in games I enjoy, one of which is Flight Simulator.
www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-7900x3d-cpu-review/3

7900X3D is much faster in productivity than 7800X3D, while being equally efficient, and now far more affordable than 16-core SKU. In Flight Simulator, all three X3D CPUs are stellar, without any competition whatsoever.

Tek-CheckTom's Hardware review of 7900X3D clearly shows which crowd could benefit using this CPU. It's no brainer CPU at this price, but not for everyone's needs. For example, it'd be perfect for me for media creation in Handbrake and in games I enjoy, one of which is Flight Simulator.
www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-7900x3d-cpu-review/3

7900X3D is much faster in productivity than 7800X3D, while being equally efficient, and now far more affordable than 16-core SKU. In Flight Simulator, all three X3D CPUs are stellar, without any competition whatsoever.

That's the thing, in the odd instance where a 14900K/KS beats a 7xxx X3D, it's slim margins. In the games where the X3D is faster, it ranges from a narrow victory to outright demolition.

I built a 7900 X3D rig for a mate the other week who primarily games at 1080p. Managed to snag new one in Canada for around 370 USD. At that price, it was pretty much a no brainer